I 


,352.07^1 

I 


City  Document. — No.  6. 


EEPORT 


JOINT  SPECIAL  COMMITTEE 


TO  OPPOSE  THE  PETITION 


ISAAC  T.  ALLARD  AND  OTHERS, 


ANIWION  OF  ROXBFRY  TO  BOSTON. 


CITY  OF  ROXBURY. 


in  Board  of  Aldermen,  Feb.  9,  1852. 

Ordered,  That  a Joint  Special  Committee  consisting  of  the  Mayor  and  two  Aider- 
men,  and  five  members  of  the  Common  Council,  be  appointed  with  instructions  to 
oppose  the  prayer  of  the  petition  of  Isaac  T.  Allard  and  others,  praying  for  the 
annexation  of  the  City  of  Roxbury  to  the  City  of  Boston,  and  that  said  Committee 
have  full  power  to  employ  counsel,  and  do  all  other  acts  necessary  and  proper  for 
opposing  the  prayer  of  said  petition. 

The  Mayor, 

Aldermen  Kittredge  and 

Williams,  appointed  on  the  part  of  this  Board. 

JOSEPH  W.  TUCKER,  City  Clerk. 


Concurred, — and 


In  Common  Council,  Feb.  9,  1852. 


Messrs.  Gaston,  (President,) 

Hickling, 

Parker,  Ward  1, 

Lewis,  and 

Leland,  joined  on  the  part  of  this  Board. 


JOSHUA  SEAVER,  Clerk. 


CITY  OF  ROXBURY. 


In  Board  of  Aldermen,  May  17,  1852. 
Laid  upon  the  table  and  ordered  to  be  printed. 

JOSEPH  W.  TUCKER,  City  Clerk. 


REPORT 


The  Special  Joint  Committee  who  were  instructed  to  oppose 
the  petition  of  Isaac  T.  Allard  and  others,  praying  for  the 
annexation  of  Roxbury  to  Boston,  before  the  Committee  on 
Towns,  of  the  Legislature,  would  respectfully  Report : 

The  petition  of  Isaac  T.  Allard  and  others  was  presented 
to  the  Legislature  in  1850;  but,  there  not  being  sufficient  time 
to  serve  an  order  of  notice  upon  the  parties  interested,  it  was 
placed  upon  the  files  of  that  year.  In  1851,  this  petition,  and 
all  other  petitions  and  papers  relating  to  the  subject,  were  taken 
from  the  files  and  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Towns.  The 
usual  order  of  notice  was  served  upon  the  parties  interested, 
and  the  matter  was  fully  heard  before  the  Committee,  who 
reported  a reference  of  the  subject  to  the  next  General  Court. 
In  1852,  (the  present  year,)  the  papers  were  taken  again  from 
the  files,  and  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Towns.  Orders  of 
Notice  were  served,  and  the  sixteenth  of  March  was  assigned 
for  the  hearing. 

The  petitioners  were  represented  before  the  Committee  by 
William  Whiting,  Esq. 

The  leading  views  entertained  by  the  petitioners  were  pre- 
sented by  Mr.  Whiting,  and  the  points,  in  brief,  were  : — 

That  there  were  1141  petitioners  in  favor  of  annexation: — 
That  within  the  last  few  years,  a most  intimate  connection 
had  grown  up  between  Roxbury  and  Boston; — 

That  a very  large,  influential  and  wealthy  class,  engaged  in 


4 


AxNNEXATION. 


[May, 


all  pursuits,  are  in  the  habit  of  coming  to  Boston  daily  to  trans- 
act their  business  ; that  the  two  cities  have  become  one,  except 
in  not  having  a city  government  in  common ; — 

That  for  the  last  three  or  four  years,  ‘‘our  unfortunate  city 
has  come  to  a stand,  comparatively  speaking;” — 

That  there  is  wanted  an  abundant  supply  of  pure  water, 
without  great  cost;  — 

That  in  the  upper  part  of  the  town  we  have  to  penetrate 
the  rocks,  and  in  the  lower  part  it  was  impossible,  at  any 
price,  to  obtain  pure  water ; — 

That  attempts  to  obtain  artesian  wells  are  abandoned ; — 
That  the  population  in  the  lower  part  is  so  crowded,  that 
there  exists  a great  want  of  Cochituate  water,  and  that  we 
desire  to  unite  with  Boston,  to  have  this  water; — 

That  we  want  common  sewers,  and  that  in  order  to  drain 
Roxhury^  we  must  connect  with  the  sewers  of  Boston  ; — 

That  we  want  better  streets;  the  present  condition  of  our 
streets  is  not  good ; — 

That  sidewalks  are  wanted — a general  system — the  Boston 
system,  to  compel  persons  to  make  sidewalks; — 

That  great  public  squares  are  wanted; — 

That  the  City  Government  of  Roxbury  are  not  apt  to  go 
into  such  generous  improvements  as  are  wanted. 

In  regard  to  the  Wants  of  Boston,  it  was  laid  down  by  Mr. 
Whiting : — 

That  Boston  wants  more  native  population ; — 

That  Boston  wants  more  territory  to  expand  upon ; — 

That  Boston  wants  to  add  to  her  commercial  impor- 
tance;— 

That  Boston  wants  to  derive  further  advantage  of  our  busi- 
ness men,  who  transact  their  business  within  her  borders, 
while  they  reside  in  Roxbury  ; — 

That  Boston  wants  to  increase  the  number  of  her  citizens 
who  will  take  and  pay  for  the  Cochituate  water;  and,  that  we 
shall  pay  her  a large  tax  for  her  water ; — 

That  Boston  wants  our  Public  Property;  Roxbury  owns 


1852.] 


CITY  DOCUMENT.— No.  6. 


5 


some  public  property  that  is  worthless  in  the  hands  of  Rox- 
bnry,  and,  without  using  Boston  to  drain  through,  is  valueless 
to  her ; but  invaluable  to  Boston  ; — 

That  Boston  wants  us  to  pay  our  share  of  her  public  debt ; 
it  is  true  our  Estates  will  be  mortgaged  to  pay  it,  and  we 
shall  be  thankful  to  do  so  for  benefits  received ; — 

That  Boston  wants  the  territory  of  Roxbury  in  preference 
to  other  places,  because  of  the  natural  connection,  &c. ; — 
That  Boston  wants  more  tax  payers,  and  we  are  willing  to 
be  tax  payers. 

And  the  results  to  Roxbury  were  : — 

That  it  will  improve  the  value  of  our  real  estate; — 

That  it  will  increase  the  number  of  our  population ; — 

That  it  will  enhance  the  comfort  of  our  dwellings,  by  add- 
ing conveniences  and  luxuries  which  we  cannot  otherwise 
obtain ; — 

That  it  will  add  to  the  health  and  happiness  of  the  poorer 
classes  already  with  us  ; — 

That  it  will  pave  the  way  for  great  improvement  in  the  class 
of  people  who  will  be  likely  hereafter  to  dwell  upon  the  marsh 
lands ; — 

That  the  citizens  generally  may  have  Pure  and  Abundant 
SUPPLY  OF  Water,  both  on  the  lowlands  and  highlands,  at  a 
rate  far  cheaper  than  it  can  be  obtained  in  any  other  way ; — 
That  we  may  have  our  lowlands  and  our  uplands  drained  by 
common  sewers,  instead  of  continuing  the  present  system; — 
That  we  may  have  our  streets  properly  graded,  surveyed, 
and  widened  (wherever  they  need  alterations)  now,  while  these 
things  can  be  done  at  small  expense ; — 

That  we  may  have  suitable  sidewalks  in  the  settled  parts  of 
the  town,  and  shade  trees  planted  and  protected; — 

That  we  may  obtain  suitable  protection  against by  the 
introduction  of  hydrants  ; — 

That  we  may  have  our  civil  courts  in  Boston,  where  wit- 
nesses, jurors,  and  parties  can  attend  with  much  greater  con- 
venience than  at  Dedham  ; — 


6 ANNEXATION.  [May, 

That  we  may  have  our  Registry  of  Deeds  in  Roxbury  or 
Boston,  instead  of  Dedham  ; — 

That  the  business  man,  by  bringing  his  Real  Estate  within 
the  limits  of  Boston,  will  be  better  able  to  dispose  of  it  at  cash 
value,  if  he  desire  to  sell,  and  more  readily  negotiate  his  mort- 
gages for  money ; — 

That  we  may  have  public  Malls,  and  Squares,  and  Foun- 
tains, the  ornaments  of  our  city,  promoting  the  health,  as 
well  as  the  happiness  of  the  people,  and  attracting  to  our  bor- 
ders gentlemen  of  wealth  and  good  taste ; — 

That  by  uniting  with  Boston,  we  may  make  a successful 
effort  to  save  the  capital  of  our  State  from  falling  under  the 
control  of  foreigners,  thereby  averting  a destiny  which  will 
involve  ourselves,  no  less  than  our  friends,  in  a common  mis- 
fortune ; — 

That  we  may  save  all  the  expense  of  a separate  City  Gov- 
ernment ; — 

That  Ave  are  opposed  by  the  city  officers, — by  the  Bank,  or 
Money  Power, — by  those  who  have  peculiar  private  interests, 
— by  honest  minded  men  who  have  been  misled, — and  by  dis- 
interested and  fair  minded  men  who  fear  all  change. 

These  points,  which  we  have  stated  but  briefly,  were  present- 
ed and  illustrated  at  length  by  Mr.  Whiting,  to  the  Committee. 

A large  amount  of  testimony  was  introduced,  which,  in  our 
opinion,  entirely  failed  to  sustain  the  positions  laid  down  in 
the  opening. 

There  was  evidence  offered  by  the  petitioners,  tending  to 
show,  that,  in  the  opinion  of  many  of  the  witnesses,  there  ex- 
isted a want  of  water  in  the  lower  parts  of  Roxbury,  upon  the 
upland  as  well  as  the  marshes,  and,  that  if  annexation  should 
take  place,  that  want  would  be  supplied  by  the  introduction 
and  distribution  of  Cochituate  water,  wherever  it  might  be 
needed;  that  it  was  wanted,  not  only  for  domestic  purposes, 
but  for  the  use  of  manufacturing  establishments.  In  certain 
seasons  of  the  year,  there  existed  a want  of  water  upon  the 
higher  lands  of  Roxbury;  wells  were  sometimes  dry ; the  cost 


1852.] 


CITY  DOCUMENT.— No.  6. 


7 


of  rock-wells  was  variously  estimated,  from  $500  to  $1000, 
according  to  their  location,  and  the  position  and  hardness  of 
the  rock. 

Jamaica  Pond  was  represented  as  being  about  18  or  20  feet 
above  marsh  level,  and  surrounded  by  dwellings ; that  the 
water  was  impure,  and,  occasionally,  offensive  smells  arose 
from  the  pond. 

It  was  admitted  that  a pretty  large  proportion  of  the  dwell- 
ings had  wells  and  other  sources  of  water.  No  evidence  was 
introduced  by  the  petitioners  tending  to  show,  that  if  annexation 
should  take  place,  Boston  would  supply  the  alleged  want  of 
water  from  the  Cochituate  pond,  or  that  there  was  a suffi- 
cient supply  there  to  meet  that  want. 

The  theory  of  the  petitioners  in  regard  to  drainage  was, 
that  in  order  to  drain  Roxbury,  a connection  must  he  made  with 
the  Boston  common  sewers  ; that  we  cannot  obtain  drainage  in 
any  other  mode,  except  at  enormous  expense. 

Mr.  Charles  Whitney  testified  that  he  was  the  author  of  the 
letter  on  pages  33,  34  and  35,  of  Mr.  Whiting’s  report  in  favor 
of  annexation,  addressed  to  the  people  of  Roxbury.  This  let- 
ter discusses  the  subject  of  drainage,  and  the  author  maintains 
that,  ^^by  connecting  the  common  sewers  of  the  two  cities  to- 
gether, so  that  our  lowlands  could  be  drained  through  Boston 
into  the  sea,  a perfect  drainage  could  be  effected  at  an  expense 
%ohich,  compared  with  the  cost  of  any  other  plan,  would  be 
trifling^ 

It  was  testified  to  by  Mr.  McBurney,  that  it  was  impossible 
to  drain  the  lowlands  without  connecting  with  the  Boston 
drains,  and  that  in  his  opinion,  an  immediate  connection  would 
be  made  if  annexed.  That  a greater  portion  of  these  low- 
lands are  marsh  lands,  and  could  be  drained  into  the  Boston 
drains  now,  independent  of  filling  up,  while  in  regard  to  other 
lands  that  cannot  be  drained  now,  there  must  be  a compulsion 
upon  people  to  fill  them  up  first. 

It  was  Mr.  Caleb  Parker’s  opinion,  that  all  the  lowlands 
would  have  to  be  filled  up,  in  order  to  drain  them ; that  it 
might  be  in  the  power  of  Roxbury  to  drain  them,  but  he 


8 


ANNEXA^JION. 


[May, 


thought  some  parts  could  not  be  drained,  except  by  a con- 
nection with  the  sewers  of  Boston.  These  opinions  were 
concurred  in  by  other  witnesses,  and  it  was  believed  by  those 
who  testified  on  this  point,  that,  in  order  to  drain  Roxbury 
effectually,  there  should  he  a connection  with  the  Boston  drams. 
But  it  Avas  not  shown  that  any  surveys  had  been  made,  or 
that  the  Boston  drains  were  of  sufficient  capacity,  and  so  con- 
structed as  to  grade,  to  admit  of  this  additional  drainage 
through  them.  It  was  in  evidence  that  lands  on  Plymouth 
street,  Roxbury  side,  suffer  from  want  of  drainage,  and  it 
was  admitted,  that  lands  on  Boston  side  suffered  in  like ‘man- 
ner. 

With  regard  to  streets  and  sidewalks,  it  was  represented 
by  some  of  the  witnesses,  that  we  wanted  better  ones.  Some 
were  very  good,  others  were  bad.  There  was  great  improve- 
ment needed  in  this  respect,  and,  if  annexation  should  take 
place,  it  was  believed  Boston  would  supply  us  with  better 
streets  and  sidewalks.  It  was  admitted  by  one  witness,  (Mr. 
Davis)  that  the  city  had  been  liberal  in  regard  to  sidewalks; 
they  would  construct  the  sidewalk  if  the  abutters  would  fur- 
nish the  edgestones.  But,  it  was  the  opinion  of  some  of  the 
witnesses,  the  Boston  system  was  needed,  to  compel  persons 
to  construct  sidewalks  in  front  of  their  estates,  ‘‘so  that,”  to 
use  the  language  of  the  counsel,  “no  wealthy  or  poor  miser 
could  prevent  or  stand  in  the  way  if  he  saw  fit.”  It  was 
stated  by  counsel  in  his  opening,  that  the  committee  would  be 
invited  to  view  our  streets,  but  no  such  invitation  was  given, 
or  the  committee  solicited  to  view  them,  to  our  knowledge. 

It  was  testified  that  we  needed  Public  Squares.  They  were 
thought  to  be  very  desirable.  In  the  opinion  of  the  witnesses, 
Boston  would  provide  these  upon  a more  liberal  scale  than  we 
can  ourselves.  A large  outlay  for  public  improvements  of  this 
character  by  the  authorities  would  not  be  sustained  by  public 
opinion,  because  Roxbury  in  its  present  condition  could  not 
well  afford  the  outlay.  The  evidence  on  this,  as  well  as 
many  other  points,  fell  far  short  of  what  was  laid  down  in  the 
opening  ; the  counsel,  in  his  opening,  declared  that  we  wanted 


1852.] 


CITY  DOCUMENT.— No.  6. 


9 


“ great  public  squares — not  a piece  of  gingerbread — as  large 
as  those  in  London  or  New  York,  and  not  so  small  that  a 
horse  in  a treadmill  might  go  round  them.”  The  evidence 
was,  that  improvements  of  this  character  were  desirable,  and 
it  was  thought  that  Boston  would  furnish  squares  upon  a 
more  liberal  scale  than  we  can  ourselves.  Mr.  Blake  did  not 
think  it  an  object  to  lay  out  much  for  squares  now,  and  Mr. 
Marsh’s  opinion  was,  that  public  squares  were  not  necessary 
to  any  great  extent — not  large  ones — hut  numerous  small  ones. 

Opinions  were  given  by  several  witnesses,  that  annexation 
would  benefit  real  estatp ; that  it  would  be  more  convenient 
to  attend  court  at  Boston  than  at  Dedham;  that  it  would  be 
more  convenient  to  have  the  Registry  of  Deeds  at  Boston,  &-c., 
&c.  The  benefit  to  real  estate  spoken  of,  we  understood  to  be 
chiefly  to  the  low  and  marsh  lands,  in  consequence  of  the  al- 
leged want  of  water  being  supplied  by  the  introduction  of  the 
Cochituate,  and  a general  system  of  drainage  established. 
Other  lands,  however,  were  to  be  benefited  by  commanding 
higher  prices,  yet  the  principal  benefit  was  supposed  to  be  to 
the  lower  and  marsh  lands. 

Mr.  S.  S.  Lewis  expressed  his  opinions  on  the  importance  of 
increasing  the  territorial  limits  of  Boston, — that  by  annexation 
its  commercial  importance  could  be  advanced.  This  he  did 
not  apply  to  Roxbury  in  particular,  but  to  all  the  adjoining 
towns  and  cities. 

It  was  testified  to  by  Mr.  Allard,  the  leading  petitioner,  that 
he  obtained  most  of  the  names  upon  the  petitions  at  different 
times  since  1850,  and  that  he  did  not  take  the  names  of  any 
that  he  did  not  suppose  were  legal  voters.  He  had  been  in- 
formed that  some  upon  the  petition  had  signed  the  remon- 
strance. The  number  of  petitioners  was  1141.  When  this 
matter  was  first  started,  the  people  in  the  upper  section  (now 
West  Roxbury)  got  up  a petition  in  aid,  but  did  not  circulate 
it:  and  it  was  depart  of  his  plan  to  obtain  names  for  division 
as  well  as  annexation.  He  made  a pretty  thorough  canvass, 
and  got  all  the  names  he  could.  Boston  people  would  ask  if 
they  could  not  sign  it,  and  said  they  rejoiced  in  it. 

2 


10 


ANNEXATION. 


[May, 


A pamphlet,  signed  by  William  Whiting  and  seventeen 
others,  entitled,  ‘‘  Report  of  the  Committee  in  favor  of  the 
Union  of  Boston  and  Roxbury,”  (which  has  been  distributed 
throughout  the  city,)  was  put  in  as  evidence,  and  the  gentle- 
men signing  the  same,  who  testified  before  the  Committee,  be- 
lieved the  statements  therein  made,  were  to  the  best  of  their 
knowledge  and  belief,  correct. 

Other  testimony  was  given  upon  various  matters,  which,  in 
our  opinion  are  not  material  to  the  subject,  as  it  is  mostly  the 
expression  of  individual  opinions  upon  subjects  in  themselves 
of  trivial  importance  to  the  merits  or  main  points  of  the  case. 

There  was  no  evidence  introduced^  to  show  that  Boston 

wanted  any  more  native  population,  to  retain  in  her  own 
hands  the  control  of  her  own  affairs,”  or  that  she  wanted 
“more  land  to  expand  upon.”  or  that  she  desired  “ to  add  to 
her  commercial  importance  in  the  eyes  of  foreigners  abroad, 
and  of  other  parts  of  our  own  country,”  or  that  she  wanted 
“the  further  advantage  of  our  business  men  to  become  citi- 
zens, who  reside  here  and  do  business  within  her  borders,” 
or  that  she  had  any  desire  to  furnish  us  with  “ Cochituate 
water,”  or  that  she  wanted  any  of  our  “ public  property,”  or 
that  “she  wanted  us  to  pay  our  share  of  her  public  debt,”  or 
that  she  “ wanted  the  territory  of  Roxbury  in  preference  to 
other  places,”  or  that  “ she  wants  more  tax  payers.”  And 
even  if  evidence  had  been  introduced  establishing  these  wants, 
we  do  not  think  it  would  have  been  sufficient  to  have  justified 
our  annihilation. 

The  evidence  for  the  petitioners  being  in,  the  case  was 
opened 

FOR  THE  REMONSTRANTS. 

Without  further  remark,  the  Committee  will  proceed  to  give 
a brief  outline  of  the  evidence  offered  to  sustain  the  positions 
assumed  by  the  remonstrants. 

The  Hon.  John  J.  Clarke  and  William  Gaston,  Esq.  ap- 
peared in  behalf  of  the  city. 

The  case  was  opened  by  Mr.  Gaston,  who  stated  the  grounds 
upon  which  the  remonstrance  was  based. 


1852.] 


CITY  DOCUMENT.—No.  6. 


11 


Evidence  was  introduced  to  show  that  from  the  1141  names 
claimed  by  the  petitioners,  Jive  hundred  and  ninety  three^  or 
more  than  one  half  of  the  whole  number^  should  be  deducted 
therefrom,  for  non-residents , not  voters^  duplicate  and  tripli- 
cate signatures^  those  who  had  since  signed  the  remonstrance^ 
&c.,  &c.,  which  would  leave  the  actual  number  of  petitioners 
548.  Your  Committee  caused  the  several  petitioners  to  be 
examined  and  compared  with  the  voting  lists  and  assessors 
books,  and  the  result  of  that  examination  was,  as  testified  to 
before  the  Committee,  as  follows,  viz. 


Number  of  Petitioners, 

From  which  should  be  deducted. 

1141 

» Non  Residents, 

141 

Not  Voters, 

53 

Signed  twice, 

137 

Signed  three  times. 

27 

Dead, 

10 

Since  signed  Remonstrance, 

225 

Making  in  all. 

593 

Which  leaves  as  Petitioners, 

548 

The  number  of  Remonstrants, 

legal  voters,  all  obtaine 

since  the  first  of  February  of  the  present  year,  was 

1,080 

Deduct  for  not  voters. 

55 

Leaving  Remonstrants, 

1,025 

This  number  is  a clear  majority  of  the  legal  voters  in  the 
city. 

As  appears  by  the  Assessors’  books,  the 
Petitioners  represent  taxable  property 
amounting  to  f 1.704.000 

The  Remonstrants  represent  taxable  property 

amounting  to  $3,558,810 

At  this  stage  of  the  proceedings,  it  was  suggested  by  the 
counsel  for  the  city,  whether  it  would  be  desirable  to  proceed 


12 


ANNEXATION. 


[May, 


farther  in  the  investigation,  as  it  appeared  that  there  were 
neither  a majority  of  the  legal  voters  petitioning  for  this  pro- 
ject, nor  a majority  of  the  taxable  property  represented,  but, 
on  the  contrary,  a majority  of  both  voters  and  property 
against  it. 

It  was  replied  to  by  the  counsel  for  the  petitioners,  that  it 
might  be  his  painful  duty  to  show  how  these  names  had  been 
obtained,  and  what  influences  had  been  brought  to  bear,  and 
what  inducements  held  out,  &c. 

The  counsel  for  the  city  rejoined,  by  demanding  that  if  any 
improper  influences  had  been  brought  to  bear  upon,  or  any 
inducements  held  out  to  the  signers  of  the  remonstrance,  to 
make  them  known  to  the  Committee.  The  remonstrants 
denied  this,  and  invited  the  closest  scrutiny  into  their  acts. 
No  proof  was  adduced  tending  to  show  that  any  inducements 
had  been  held  out  or  any  improper  influences  brought  to  bear. 

The  Committee  decided  that  the  examination  might  pro- 
ceed. 

Testimony  was  offered  to  show  the  increase  of  the  popula- 
tion and  wealth  of  the  city.  The  ground  taken  by  the  peti- 
tioners was,  that  Roxbury  began  to  flourish  about  as  far  back 
as  1837  or  38,  and,  for  a few  years,  it  would  have  been  diffi- 
cult to  find  a village  which  promised  better  for  the  future. 
But  within  the  last  three  or  four  years,  she  has  not  advanced, 
but  has  come  comparatively  to  a stand  still. 

The  following  comparative  statements  of  population  and 
wealth,  in  evidence  before  the  Committee,  show  a different 
state  of  things : 

Roxbury  in  1840,  had  a population  of  8310 

“ 1850,  ‘‘  ‘‘  ‘‘  18,316 


Showing  an  increase  of  10.006 

or  one  hundred  and  twenty  and  one  quarter  per  cent.  gain. 

Only  three  towns  in  this  Commonwealth  have  gained  so 
muchj  viz  : — Chelsea,  in  Suffolk  County  ; Milford,  a manufac- 
turing town  in  Worcester  County;  and  Natick,  a railroad  vil- 
lage and  manufacturing  town  in  Middlesex. 


.852.] 


CITY  DOCUMENT.— No.  6. 


13 


The  gain  of  what  is  now  Roxbury,  since  West  Roxbnry* 
has  been  carved  out,  cannot  be  obtained  for  the  ten  years. 
But  a census  was  taken  of  the  town  in  the  last  year  of  the 
town  government  in  1845,  and  in  1850  the  State  census  was 
taken  in  Wards.  From  this,  it  appears  that: — 

In  1845,  the  five  lower  Wards,  now  Roxbury,  had  11,409 
1850,  ‘‘  ‘‘  ‘‘  “ “ “ 15,150 

Showing  a gain  in  jive  years  of  3,741 

or  about  thirty-three  per  cent. 

In  1845,  Wards  6,  7 & 8,  now  West  Roxbury,  had  2,520 

“ 1850,  “ 3,166 

Showing  a gain  in  jive  years  of  646 

or  twenty-five  per  cent. 

In  1845,  the  “community”  in  West  Roxbury  numbered 
about  100,  and  none  in  1850.  If  we  add  this  and  the  new 
railroad  facilities,  the  gain  will  be  about  the  same.  The  advo- 
cates for  division  last  year,  complained  that  Roxbury  had 
increased  faster,  in  every  way,  than  West  Roxbury. 

Assessors'  Valuation  and  Rateable  Polls, 


Year. 

Valuation. 

Rateable  Polls. 

1838 

$5,979,900 

2,046 

1839 

6.478.600 

2,129 

1840 

6.721.000 

2,300 

In  population  8,310 

1841 

6.941.600 

2,474 

1842 

7.328.600 

2,574 

1843 

7.710.000 

2,554 

1844 

8.578.600 

2,987 

1845 

9.569.800 

3,433 

1846 

12.531.100 

3,666 

In  1845  population  13.929. 

1847 

12.628.300 

3,806 

1848 

13.192.600 

3,999 

1849 

13.476.600 

3,982 

1850 

13.712.800 

4,125 

1851 

13.933.200 

4,223 

In  1850  population  18.316. 

Incorporated,  May  24th,  1851. 


14 


ANNEXATION. 


[May, 


showing  a progressive  gain  in  population  from  1845  to  1850 
of  4387  persons,  and  a like  gain  in  property  of  $4,143,000; 
about  thirty-three  per  cent,  in  numbers,  and  forty-five  per 
cent,  in  property. 

The  theory  of  the  petitioners,  that  Roxbury  began  to  flour- 
ish as  far  back  as  1837  or  38,  and  for  a few  years  no  place 
promised  better  things  for  the  future,  but  within  the  last 
three  or  four  years  she  has  not  advanced,  is  not  sustained  by 
evidence. 

Charlestown  in  1840,  had  10,872  inhabitants;  Charlestown 
and  Somerville  together  in  1850  had  19,043,  showing  a gain  of 
only  seventy-five  per  cent. 


Boston,  in  1840,  had  83,970 

“ 1850,  “ 138,788 

showing  a gain  of  sixty-five  and  a quarter  per  cent. 

Cambridge  in  1840,  had  8,127 

“ “ 1850,  had  14,825 

showing  a gain  of  eighty  and  a half  per  cent. 

Brookline  in  1840,  had  1,123 

‘‘  ‘‘  1850,  2,353 

showing  a gain  of  one  hundred  and  nine  per  cent. 

Dorchester  in  1840,  had  4,458 

“ “ 1850,  7,578 

showing  a gain  of  seventy-five  per  cent. 

Dedham  in  1840,  had  3,157 

“ 1850,  ‘‘  4,379 


only  a little  more  than  thirty-eight  and  a half  per  cent. 

The  following  table  will  show  the  increase  of  Roxbury,  as 
compared  with  other  cities  in  our  vicinity,  according  to  the 
State  valuation. 


1852.] 


CITY  DOCUMENT.— No.  6. 


15 


Roxbury, 

Boston, 

Cambridge, 

Charlestown, 

including 

Somerville, 


1840. 

.$3,257,503 

109.314.218 

4.479.501 

( 4.033.176 


1850. 

$13,613,731 

213.310.067 

10.608.787 

10.727.321 


Increase. 
317  per  ct. 
95 

136  “ 

166 


It  was  represented  by  the  petitioners,  that  the  rate  of  tax  in 
Boston  was  $7  on  the  thousand,  and  in  Roxbury  $6.60.  If 
this  was  the  only  difference  in  taxation,  it  would  be  compara- 
tively trifling.  But  it  was  shown  by  evidence,  that  there  was 
a vast  difference  in  valuation  between  the  two  cities,  and  the 
rate  of  taxation  was  not  a fair  criterion  to  show  the  difference 
in  taxation  between  them.  As  an  illustration  of  this,  the  val- 
uation of  property  (border  lands,)  on  each  side  of  the  divid- 
ing line,  as  taken  from  the  books  of  the  assessors  of  both  cities, 
was  shown  by  the  following  statement,  which  was  sworn  to 
by  one  of  our  assessors. 


TN  WARD  I,  ROXBURY. 

C.  J.  Hendee,  30,000  feet  of  land,  Fellows  street,  taxed  on 
a valuation  of  $2,400,  or  8 cents  per  foot. 

‘‘  20,000  feet  of  land  on  Hunneman  St.  $1,600,  or 

8 cts.  per  ft.  24,600  feet.  School  Marsh,  $3,000,  or  12  cents 
per  foot. 

IN  BOSTON. 

Land  taxed  in  Ward  11,  Boston,  and  adjoining  some  of  the 
above,  and  no  more  valuable,  as  follows  : 

C.  J.  Hendee  13,000  feet  land  $5,200  40  cts.  per  ft. 

‘‘  “ 15,000  Fellows  st.  3.000  20  “ •“ 

‘‘  15,000  “ ‘‘2.500  16  2-3  “ 

Chas.  Davis,  land.  Fellows  st.  4,000  ft.  $600  15  cts.  per  ft. 
W.  Fellows,  “ “ 13,000  “ 2.200  16  2-3  “ 

W.  Davis,  Jr.  “ “ 11,000  “ 1.800  “ 

Susan  Johnson,  “ 12,000  “ 2.000  “ 

A.  S.  Lewis,  “ “ 12,000  “ 2.000  “ “ 


16 


ANNEXATION. 


[May, 


IN  ROXBURY. 


Lands  of  same  quality,  and  adjoining  the  above : 


Charles  Davis, 
Ralph  S.  Dorr, 


30,000  feet  |2.400  8 cts.  per  ft. 


5 acres 
20,000 
6,000 
31,400 
29,000 


5.000 
1.600  8 

400  7 

4.000  13 
2.600  9 

400  7 

1.000  10 
4.0001  8 
3.200 


W.  Davis, 

“ ‘‘for  wharf, 

W.  C.  Himneman 
J.  N.  Johnson,  Fellows  St.  6,000  “ 

“ “ School  Marsh, 

A.  S.  Lewis,  Fellow  St.  5,000  “ 

Thomas  Simmons,  8 acres  marsh, 

(Farther  down  upon  the  point,  valuation 
we  pass  to  higher  lands,  but  bordering  some 
above  described.) 

Joseph  Ballister,  7 acres,  near  Dorchester,  ^4. 

1 

10, 
1 

18, 
2 
42 
2.1 
7. 

12.1 


Marsh,  ^500  acre. 
House  and  land, 


Martin  Brimmer,  2 
John  E.  Brown,  14 
Enoch  Bartlett,  20  “ “ “ “ 

Caroline  L.  Eustis,  “ “ “ 

W.  B.  Kingsbury,  Davis  street,  18,400 
Sumner  & Williams,  Williams’  Farm, 
Tillson  Williams,  Eustis  street,  19,000  ft. 
Nancy  Weld,  6 acres, 

Williams  & Kingsbury,  48.000  feet, 
which  valuation  is  for  buildings. 


per  acre ; then 
of  the  lots  on  the 


000  1|  ct.  per  ft. 

.000 

.000-500  per  acre 
000  “ “ 
.000 

000  11  cts.  pr  ft. 
000  “ “ 

000  10  “ “ 

000  .$1,200  prac. 
000  one  half  of 


IN  BOSTON. 


Stephen  M.  Allen  20  tenements,  costing  about  $250  each, 
with  228,000  feet  of  land  $30,000,  leaving  the  land  taxed  at 
12J  cts.  per  foot. 

IN  ROXBURY,  WARD  2. 

Corresponding  lands  taxed  at  $1,000  per  acre,  or  less  than 
3 cents  per  foot,  viz: — 

Samuel  Langley,  4 acres  marsh,  $2,000 

Samuel  Morse,  2J  “ “ 2.600 


1852.J  CITY  DOCUMENT.— No.  6.  17 

•Sidney  B.  Morse,  acres  marsh,  2.600 

H.  J.  Oliver,  2 acres  of  land  adjoining  Boston,  2.000 
Robert  Ralston,  acres  upland  and  3J  acres 

flats,  Mill  Dam,  adjoining  Boston.  4.000 

Benjamin  Sewall,  100,000  feet  land,  4.000 

David  Sears,  12  acres  land  adjoining,  8.000 

J.  G.  Tappan  and  others,  7 acres  marsh,  7.000 
Other  Large  Lots. 

Susan  Davis,  house,  barn,  and  land,  on  Wash- 
ington St.,  mostly  upland,  and  bounding  on 
Boston  ; 4 acres  upland,  3 marsh.  25.000 

Charles  Davis,  10,000  feet,  Adams  Place,  800 

James  Ellison,  19,500  feet,  Ruggles  street,  1.400 

Ebenezer  Francis,  35  acres  upland  and  marsh,  20.000 
Samuel  H.  Hunneman,  29,019  feet,  Williams 

place,  fronting  on  three  streets,  4.000 


By  the  foregoing  statement  it  will  be  seen  that  there  is  a 
vast  difference  in  the  valuation  of  the  two  cities ; and  we  be- 
lieve the  committee  of  the  citizens,  in  their  report  against  an- 
nexation, were  greatly  within  bounds  when  they  stated  “ that 
real  estate  generally  in  Boston  is  valued,  for  taxation,  for 
what  it  will  bring  under  favorable  circumstances,  while  in 
Roxbury  it  is  valued  for  what  it  will  bring  under  w^ifavorable 
circumstances — a difference  ranging  from  25  to  50  jper  cent. 
Farther  evidence  is  found  in  the  fact,  that  the  taxes  of  Boston 
are  nearly  ten  dollars  a headj  while  in  Roxbury  they  are  only 
about  five. 

It  was  satisfactorily  shown  to  the  Legislative  Committee, 
that  there  did  not  exist  such  a great  want  of  water  as  was 
represented  by  the  petitioners.  It  was  shown  that  nothing  was 
ever  heard  of  the  want  of  water,  until  the  annexation  project 
was  started ; that  it  was  annexation  that  suggested  this  and 
other  wants,  and  not  this  and  other  wants,  suggested  annex- 
ation. The  testimony  went  to  show  that  the  lower  part  of 
the  city  was  generally  well  supplied  with  good^  wholesome  and 
pure  water^ — that,  upon  the  upland,  a good  well,  furnishing 
an  abundant  supply,  could  be  obtained  at  a small  cost,  vary- 


18 


ANNEXATION. 


[May, 


ing  from  $10  to  $350 ; and  even  upon  the  marsh  lands  ex- 
cellent water  had  been  obtained.  The  marsh  lands  were  very 
little  built  upon,  and  as  yet  no  great  want  of  water  was  felt 
there,  and  the  want,  whatever  it  might  be,  whether  great  or 
small,  could  be  easily  supplied  from  water  from  Jamaica  Pond, 
without  annexation,  Upon  the  higher  lands,  it  was  no 
evidence^  that  no  want  of  water  existed.  Rock-wells  have  been 
dug,  varying  in  cost  from  $200  to  $350,  furnishing  an  unfail- 
ing supply.  Occasionally  some  few  of  these  might  fail  in  a 
very  dry  season,  while,  generally  speaking,  nearly  all  furnish- 
ed a bountiful  and  steady  supply.  Those  that  failed,  perhaps, 
were  not  of  a sufficient  depth.  There  was  no  need  of^  nor 
any  want  of  Cochituate  loater  upon  the  higher  lands.  A por- 
tion of  what  is  known  among  us  as  ‘‘  the  Highlands,”  and 
the  section  around  “ Parker’s  Hill,”  even  if  there  was  a want 
of  water  there,  which  there  is  not,  and  they  desired  the  Co- 
chituate, it  could  not  well  be  furnished  from  that  source,  as 
the  land  is  higher  than  the  reservoir  in  Brookline ; though 
even  if  they  were  so  situated  as  to  be  reached  by  the  Cochit- 
uate pipes,  it  would  be  deemed  impracticable  to  furnish  water 
from  this  source,  in  consequence  of  the  immense  cost  of  cutting 
through  the  ledges  of  rock  for  the  purpose  of  laying  the  pipes, 
to  supply  the  very  few  who  might  be  prevailed  upon  to  take 
and  pay  for  it.  But  the  matter  of  supplying  any  part  of  our 
city  from  Cochituate  Pond  is  fully  set  to  rest,  as  will  be  seen 
by  the  testimony,  in  another  part  of  this  report. 

It  was  clearly  shown  that  there  was  no  want  of  water  for 
the  use  of  our  manufacturing  establishments.  Mr.  Guild’s 
tanning  and  currying  establishment,  adjoining  the  Boston 
Belting  Co.’s  premises,  (which  offered  through  Mr.  McBur- 
ney  $900  or  $1,000  a year  for  the  Cochituate,)  and  which  re- 
quires large  quantities  of  water,  was  well  and  amply  supplied 
from  a well  and  a brook  which  passes  through  the  premises. 
Wells,  furnishing  an  unfailing  supply,  can  be  obtained  in  this 
vicinity  at  a very  small  cost. 

In  regard  to  wells,  and  the  cost  of  digging  them,  the  follow- 
ing is  a brief  abstract  of  the  evidence. 


1852.] 


CITY  DOCUMENT.— No.  6. 


19 


Mt.  Beecher  had  dug  five  wells  on  high  land  and  through 
rock,  and  two  on  low  lands.  One  on  Washington  Street,  42 
feet  deep,  through  hard  rock,  including  the  pump,  cost  $250 
completed.  One  on  Water  Street,  in  marsh,  cost  $10:  has 
had  an  engine  upon  it  constantly  and  never  knew  it  to  fail. 
The  water  of  this  well  is  used  for  dyeing,  which  requires  the 
best  and  purest  water.  One  dug  on  upland  cost  about  $30 
or  $40.  All  around  the  borders  of  marsh,  cost  trifling;  water 
sufficient  in  quantity  and  soft. 

Mr.  Samuel  Guild  had  dug  two  wells  on  the  Highlands,  60 
feet  deep,  one  of  them  three-quarters,  the  other  two-thirds 
through  hard  rock,  cost,  complete,  about  $350  each  ; water 
pure  and  abundant.  This  is  one  of  the  hardest  places  to  dig- 
wells.  Water  at  tan  yard,  (next  to  Boston  Belting  Co.’s  es- 
tablishment,) pure,  soft  and  abundant.  Cost  of  wells  in  this 
vicinity  trifling. 

Mr.  Kittredge  had  dug  nine  wells  on  the  Highlands.  The 
average  cost,  complete,  was  $210  each.  The  highest  cost 
$350,  through  rock  from  top-  to  bottom,  40  odd  feet. 
Another,  50  feet,  all  rock,  cost  $300.  This  was  done  by  con- 
tract. Same  contractor  dug  another  for  $200.  Two  wells 
through  gravel,  the  one  cost  $125,  the  other  $150.  The  others 
cost  less  than  this.  All  these  wells  are  unfailing,  and  the 
water  excellent  in  quality. 

Mr.  W.  G.  Lewis’s  well,  corner  Centre  and  Cedar  Streets, 
cost  $20 ; water  pure,  soft  and  abundant.  On  estate  opposite, 
well  dug  last  summer  at  a cost  of  $25. 

Mr.  James  Guild’s  well,  costing  $350,  60  feet  deep,  40  of 
which  is  through  rock  ; at  dryest  time  last  summer  had  about 
22  feet  of  water. 

Mr.  Edward  Wyman’s  well,  near  Walnut  Street,  in  vicin- 
ity of  Montrose  Avenue,  cost  $210,  is  18  feet  through  rock, 
supplies  two  families  amply.  Some  wells  in  this  vicinity  cost 
more,  others  less  ; a well  opposite  cost  $30. 

Evidence  was  introduced  by  the  petitioners  to  show  that 
other  wells  upon  the  Highlands  had  cost  more  than  those 
alluded  to  by  the  testimony  of  the  remonstrants.  There  are, 


20 


ANNEXATION. 


[May, 


undoubtedly,  instances  where  wells  have  cost  more  than  those 
spoken  of  in  the  testimony  of  the  remonstrants,  owing  to  their 
location,  hardness  of  the  rock,  and  the  unskilful  manner  in 
which  they  are  dug;  but  these  are  exceptions.  It  cannot  be 
said  that,  as  a general  thing,  the  cost  of  wells  is  greater  than 
is  represented  by  the  testimony  we  have  briefly  given. 

Jamaica  Pond  water  was  represented  by  the  petitioners  to 
be  impure,  and  unfit  for  domestic  purposes.  To  sustain  this 
position,  it  was  endeavored  to  be  shown  by  the  testimony  of 
Mr.  R.  M.  Morse,  who  has  resided  near  the  margin  of  the 
pond  for  some  eleven  years,  that  the  water  was  impure ; that 
people  bathed  in  the  pond;  that  the  hills  around  were  highly 
manured,  and  they  drained  into  it ; that  offensive  odors  had 
occasionally  arisen  from  it,  and  could  be  smelt  for  half  a 
mile  ; that  a small  stream  runs  into  it  from  Brookline ; that 
he  had  avoided  the  restaurateurs  in  Boston  that  used  the 
water  for  cooking,  or  upon  their  tables.  It  was  admitted  by 
Mr.  Morse,  on  cross-examination,  that  the  city  authorities  of 
Roxbury  immediately  put  a stop  to  bathing  between  sunrise 
and  sunset,  when  requested  by  the  people  in  that  section  to 
do  so ; and  that  he  had  noticed  some  kind  of  a smell  from 
Mystic  Pond,  in  a slight  degree,  and  in  other  ponds  not  so 
much ; also,  that  large  quantities  of  ice  were  taken  annually 
from  the  pond. 

For  the  remonstrants,  it  was  shown  by  Mr.  Thomas  A. 
Dexter,  who  was  Treasurer  of  the  Aqueduct  Corporation  from 
1818  to  1822,  and  again  from  1830  to  1848,  when  the  fran- 
chise was  sold  to  Boston,  that  the  water  was  of  the  very 
'purest  quality  ; that  it  had  been  shown,  by  repeated  analyses, 
to  be  superior,  in  purity  and  quality,  to  any  other  water  that 
had  been  compared  with  it.  There  were  great  regrets  ex- 
pressed by  the  customers  when  they  were  obliged  to  give  up 
the  use  of  it,  and  a great  many  have  stated  that  they  preferred 
it  to  Cochituate.  The  pond  is  supplied  by  springs.  In  the 
spring  of  the  year,  when  there  had  been  an  unusual  quantity 
of  snow,  the  taste  of  the  water  was  somewhat  affected,  only 
for  a brief  period.  This  occurred  only  in  three  or  four  years 


CITY  r30CUMENT.—No.  6. 


21 


1852.J 

during  Mr.  Dexter’s  knowledge  of  the  pond.  There  was  an 
offensive  smell  and  peculiar  taste  to  the  water,  on  one  occa- 
sion a few  years  ago.  An  investigation  was  made  to  discover 
the  cause  of  it,  and  it  was  his  opinion  that  a large  body  of  fish 
had  collected  near  the  aqueduct  house,  and,  owing  to  the  in- 
tensity of  the  cold,  had  died  there.  A similar  smell  and  taste 
was  noticed  the  last  year  in  the  Cochituate  water.  An  offer 
has  been  made  by  Mr.  Dexter  of  $20,000  for  the  franchise, 
and  the  Cochituate  Water  Board  now  have  the  subject  under 
consideration. 

Mr.  Thomas  E.  Chickering,  who  has  resided  upon  the 
margin,  and  within  a few  rods  of  the  pond,  for  the  last  five 
years,  has  used  the  water  directly  from  it,  and  it  was  be- 
lieved Mr.  Perkins  did  also.  Many  persons  fill  their  ice 
houses  from  it.  Mr.  Chickering  knew  of  no  causes  of  im- 
purity in  the  water,  other  than  washing  carriages,  horses, 
and  bathing,  if  they  could  be  called  such ; and  these  could 
easily  be  prevented,  if  necessary. 

It  was  shown  by  Mr.  Francis  C.  Head,  that  the  small 
stream,  flowing  into  the  pond  from  Brookline,  was  perfectly 
clear,  and  no  impurities  were  conveyed  into  it'  from  that 
source.  It  was  his  opinion  that  the  water  from  Capt.  Bacon’s 
hill  was  not  impure,  and  whatever  drainage  might  flow  into 
the  pond  from  this  source,  whether  more  or  less,  could  not 
affect  the  water  in  the  least  degree.  He  had  known  the  pond 
for  twenty-two  years,  and  had  never  heard  any  complaints  of 
offensive  smells  before.  He,  as  an  alderman,  by  direction  of 
the  Board,  had  taken  measures  to  prevent  bathing  between 
sunrise  and  sunset. 

Mr.  J.  H.  Wilkins  had  resided  within  a short  distance  of 
the  pond  for  the  summer  season,  for  many  years,  and  had 
always  regarded  it  as  very  pure.  He  had  taken  means  to 
inform  himself  upon  the  results  of  analysis.  This  water  was 
considered  best.  He  had  never  heard  an  intimation  of  any 
smell  from  the  pond.  There  was  nothing  on  the  margin  of 
the  pond  that  he  should  regard  as  impurities. 

Joshua  Seaver,  Joseph  W.  Dudley,  W.  G.  Lewis,  Thomas 


22 


ANNEXATION 


[May, 


Adams,  and  others,  testified  to  the  reputation  of  the  water  for 
purity,  and  they  never  before  had  tieard  it  called  in  question, 
or  had  known  or  heard  of  any  offensive  smells  arising  from  it. 

W e submit  to  your  careftil  attention  the  evidence  in  rela- 
tion to  the  Cochituate  water,  and  the  adequacy  of  a supply, 
from  that  source,  &c. 

The  counsel  for  the  petitioners  assumed,  when  speaking  of 
the  wants  of  Boston,  that  “ Boston  wanted  to  increase  the 
number  of  her  citizens  who  will  take  and  pay  for  the  Cochit- 
uate water and,  in  his  report  in  favor  of  annexation,  put  in 
as  evidence,  he  says : — “ This  question  is  too  important  to  be 
left  to  conjecture.  The  engineer  of  the  Boston  Water  Works 
has  set  the  subject  at  rest.  From  his  reports  and  statements, 
the  result  of  personal  knowledge,  the  highest  authority  on 
which  we  can  rely,  it  is  evident  that  the  fear  of  an  inadequate 
supply  of  water  is  id  holly  groundless.  There  is  an  abundance 
of  water  to  supply  the  wants  of  Boston  and  Roxbiiry^  in  all 
probability^  for  a century  to  come.’’^ 

The  ground  taken  by  us  Avas,  that  we  did  not  believe  in 
the  adequacy  of  the  supply  of  water  from  Lake  Cochituate ; 

That  even  if  there  were  no  doubts  as  to  a sufficient  supply, 
Boston  would  not  furnish  us  with  water  from  that  source,  be- 
cause the  amount  received  from  us  would  not  be  sufficient  to 
remunerate  her  for  the  outlay  ; 

That  they  would  furnish  us  from  Jamaica  Pond,  if  needed, 
which  was  valuable  to  them,  chiefly,  we  might  say,  almost 
only,  for  this  purpose,  and  that  the  want  of  water,  whatever 
it  might  be,  could  be  supplied  without  annexation. 

The  evidence  sustaining  these  positions  is  conclusive. 

It  was  shown  by  the  testimony  of  Hon.  John  H.  Wilkins, 
one  of  the  Cochituate  Water  Board,  that  the  Board,  at  the  re- 
quest of  the  Mayor  of  Boston,  held  a meeting  to  consider 
whether  they  would  be  able  to  supply  Roxbury  with  Cochit- 
uate water,  and  the  Board  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
prospect  of  remuneration  was  so  small.,  that  they  woidd  not  in- 
cur the  expense  of  laying  the  pipes,  and  that  it  would  be  haz- 
ardous in  attempting  to  supply  Roxbury.  The  increase  of  the 


1852.] 


CITY  DOCUMENT.— No.  6. 


23 


number  of  gallons  per  head,  this  year,  has  vastly  exceeded 
any  estimate.  The  original  estimate  was  28|  gallons  per  day 
to  each  individual,  but  it  had  greatly  exceeded  that  estimate. 
The  consumption  last  year  was  66  gallons.  The  engineer 
was  directed  to  make  an  examination  in  reference  to  supply- 
ing a portion  of  Roxbury,  and  his  report  was  adverse.  The 
cost  of  supplying  the  parts  of  Roxbury  that  might  require 
water,  Mr.  Wilkins  could  not  say  precisely,  but  somewhere 
in  the  neighborhood  of  $300,000.  The  prospect  of  remune- 
ration is  such  as  would  not  warrant  this  outlay.  The  pipes 
are  now  overworked.  The  supply  might  perhaps  be  greatly 
increased,  but  a portion  of  the  works  would  have  to  be  made 
over  again,  and  this  could  be  done  only  at  great  cost. 

Measures  have  been  taken  by  the  Commissioners  to  prevent 
the  waste  of  water,  but  they  had  not  been  able  to  accomplish 
it  to  any  great  extent. 

If  Boston  had  the  power  to  take  up  the  streets  of  Roxbury, 
and  a sufficient  number  would  take  it^  he  thought  they  would  be 
glad  to  supply  the  dense  population  'with  loaier  from  Jamaica 
Pond.  It  has  been  a matter  of  conversation  with  the  Board 
to  supply  Roxbury  with  water  from  Jamaica  Pond.  No  ap- 
plication has  been  made  to  the  Board  in  session. 

The  official  action  of  the  Cochituate  Water  Board,  on  the 
communication  of  Mayor  Seaver,  is  found  in  the  following  let- 
ter from  Thomas  Wetmore,  Esq.,  President,  to  the  Mayor, 
which  was  presented  and  read  to  the  Committee  ; — 

^ Office  of  Cochituate  Water  Boards 
I Boston^  March  29,  1852. 

Hon.  Benjamin  Seaver, 

Mayor,  &c.,  &c. 

Sir — I have  received  and  laid  before  the  Water  Board,  your 
communication  on  the  subject  of  supplying  the  city  of  Rox- 
bury with  the  Cochituate  water.  You  request  the  opinion  of 
the  Board  especially  “ Whether  our  supply  of  water  would  be 
adequate  for  such  an  extension  of  the  aqueduct, — the  cost  and 


24 


ANNEXATION. 


[May 


practicability  of  the  work, — and  how  the  interest  of  the  city 
would  be  affected,  in  reference  to  its  property  in  the  Jamaica 
Pond  Aqueduct.”  With  regard  to  the  supply  of  water,  we 
presume  you  have  reference  to  our  present  means  of  storage 
at  the  lake,  and  of  conducting  thence  to  Brookline  reservoir. 
The  original  calculation  was,  that  we  might  depend  on  a 
supply  of  ten  millions  of  gallons  a day,  and  I know  of  no 
reason  for  supposing  that  it  was  incorrect.  The  daily  average 
consumption  last  year  was  6,883,782  gallons,  and  there  has 
been  an  increase  this  year  in  the  daily  consumption  on  the 
same  period  of  last  year  of  more  than  a million  and  a half  of 
gallons  ; so  that  we  shall  probably  want,  for  our  own  use, 
in  the  city,  nearly  the  whole  supply  which  our  present  means 
will  afford  during  the  present  year,  and,  therefore,  if  we  at- 
tempt to  supply  Roxbury,  we  shall,  probably,  in  a short  time, 
be  obliged  to  increase  our  means  of  storage  at  the  lake,  by 
raising  the  present  dam,  and,  of  course,  the  works  connected 
with  the  gate  house.  With  regard  to  the  cost  and  practica- 
bility, the  City  Engineer,  under  the  direction  of  the  Board,  has 
examined  the  parts  of  Roxbury  where  the  distributing  pipes 
are  to  be  laid,  and  reports  that  the  whole  expense  will  be 
$272,000  about.  This  includes  the  laying  of  another  thirty 
inch  main  to  the  Brookline  reservoir,  and  the  construction  of 
a reservoir.  Something,  however,  should  be  deducted  from 
this  amount,  from  the  benefit  which  Boston  would  derive 
from  the  laying  a new  main,  and  connecting  it  with  the  two 
mains  which  now  supply  the  city,  say  $50,000.  With  such 
a deduction,  we  are  still  of  opinion  that  the  water  rates  which 
we  would  receive  in  Roxbury  would  not  be  equal  to  the  in- 
terest on  the  cost,  necessary  expenses  of  future  repairs,  &c.,  &c. 
With  regard  to  Jamaica  Pond  Aqueduct,  its  value  consists 
almost  exclusively  in  supplying  the  lower  parts  of  Roxbury, 
and  if  they  are  supplied  with  Cochituate  water,  the  pond  will 
be  rendered  almost  valueless. 

The  Water  Board  would  therefore  beg  leave  to  state  to  you, 
as  their  decided  opinion^  that  the  supply  of  loater  from  Lake 
Cochituate  ought  to  he  confined  to  the  present  limits  of  the 


1852.] 


CITY  DOCUMENT.— No.  6. 


25 


city^  and  that  we  cannot  undertake  to  supply  Roxhury  from 
that  source  without  looking  forward  to  a considerable  increase 
in  the  water  debt. 

I am,  very  respectfully, 

For  the  Cochituate  Water  Board, 

(Signed)  Thomas  Wetmore,  President. 

In  regard  to  Drainage.  The  petitioners  endeavored  to  show 
that  there  existed  a great  want  of  common  sewers ; that  we 
required  a system  of  underground  drainage  ; ‘‘  that  it  was  not 
too  much  to  say,  that  underground  drainage  was  absolutely 
indispensable  p and  “that  this  drainage  cannot,  without 
enormous  expense,  be  etfected,  unless  by  a connection  with  the 
common  seioers  of  Boston.’’^  “It  is  possible  f says  Mr.  Whit- 
ing, in  his  report,  page  13,  “ to  drain  the  south  east  part  of 
Roxhury  by  building  sewers  through  the  marshes  or  down 
near  Northampton  street,  but  as  to  the  rest  of  the  town,  to 
attempt  any  other  plan  of  under  drainage.^  except  by  uniting 
with  the  common  sewers  now  already  extended  by  Boston  near- 
ly to  the  line^  would  be  attended  with  enormous  expense,  if  it 
could  be  effected  at  alV^ 

Mr.  Charles  Whitney’s  opinion  was,  that  “ by  connecting 
the  common  sewers  of  the  two  cities  together.^  so  that  our  low 
lands  could  be  drained  through  Boston  into  the  sea,  a perfect 
drainage  could  be  effected^  at  an  expense  lohich^  compared  loith 
the  cost  of  any  other  plan uwuld  be  trifling.'’^ 

Testimony  was  offered  tending  to  sustain  this  view  of  the 
petitioners.  It  was  the  opinion  of  the  witnesses  that  our 
lands  could  not  be  drained  properly,  without  a connection 
with  the  sewers  of  Boston.  They  did  not  pretend  to  possess 
any  accurate  information  upon  the  subject,  founded  upon  the 
results  of  an  investigation. 

Mr.  Whitney  testified  that  he  was  the  author  of  the  letter 
in  Mr.  Whiting’s  report,  pp.  33,  34  and  35,  and  believed  the 
statements  therein  contained  to  be  correct.^  Upon  cross  ex- 
amination, he  admitted  that  he  had  not  taken  any  instrument- 
al levels^  nor  received  his  statements  from  any  engineer ; it 
4 


20 


ANNEXATION. 


[May, 


was  his  opinion  merely,  and  that  opinion  was  not  formed 
from  the  results  of  any  surveys  made  either  by  himself  or 
others.  He  had  taken  some  minutes  from  the  books  of  the 
W ater  Power  Company. 

These  views  and  opinions  were  shown  to  be  entirely  erro- 
neous, by  actual  surveys,  and  the  project  of  connecting  with 
the  drains  of  Boston  absurd,  as  will  be  seen  by  the  evidence. 

We  caused  an  examination  to  be  made,  in  reference  to  the 
drainage  of  the  city,  by  William  P.  Parrott,  Esq.,  a distin- 
guished Civil  Engineer,  who  was  employed  upon  the  surveys 
for  the  drains  and  sewers  of  Boston,  extending  to  our  line, 
in  connection  with  Mr.  Chesbrough,  the  City  Engineer  of 
Boston.  Mr.  Parrott  was  assisted  in  his  examination  by 
Charles  H.  Poole,  Esq.,  Civil  Engineer  of  this  city. 

It  was  shown  by  Mr.  Parrott,  that  Roxbury  could  not  he 
drained  into  the  Boston  sewers  ; that  the  sewers  there  were 
constructed  in  reference  to  Boston  alone,  and  their  dimensions 
and  capacity  were  adapted  to  that  service  and  no  other ; that 
the  sewers  at  Roxbury  line  would  be  such  that  Roxbury 
coidd  not  drain  into  then;  that  when  the  Boston  sewers  were 
about  being  constructed,  it  was  discussed  by  the  Committee, 
whether  they  should  be  arranged  so  that  there  might  be  a 
connection  with  sewers  that  might  be  built  at  Roxbury,  and 
that  it  was  determined  by  them  to  have  no  reference  to  the 
drainage  of  Roxbury^  but  to  confine  them  to  the  tei'ritory 
and  present  limits  of  Boston  ; that  two  thirds  of  the  system 
has  been  carried  out  with  that  view  already ; — 

That  there  are  only  two  ways  that  sewerage  of  Roxbury 
can  be  effected  to  tide  water  : one  way  across  to  South  Bay, 
— no  part  touching  Boston ; the  other  through  the  empty 
basin  under  the  Worcester  Rail  Road ; and  that  this  can  be 
done  without  touching  the  territory  of  Boston.  And  that  if 
constructed  through  Boston  it  would  be  too  low.  And  that 
a sewer  for  Roxbury  coxdd  not  well  be  constructed  by  going 
out  of  the  territory  of  Roxbury. — 

And  that  the ‘better  line  would  be  into  the  South  Bay,  re- 
quiring about  5000  feet  in  length  ; and  that  on  another  line 


1S52J 


CITY  DOCUMENT.— No.  6. 


27 


the  distance  would  be  8000  feet,  and  that  the  fall  in  both 
would  be  about  the  same.  And  that  another  advantage  of 
the  short  line  is,  that  it  would  cross  all  the  cross  drainage  of 
the  city.  This  would  take  the  drainage  of  the  entire  territory 
down  to  Davis  street,  except  a small  portion  of  land  towards 
Brookline  and  a small  portion  near  Dorchester; — 

And  that  the  cost  of  this  sewer  (of  5000  feet)  would  be  from 
$35,000  to  $40,000,  including  raising  the  grade  of  streets. 
And  that  the  cost  of  Boston  sewers  was  proportionally  the 
same.  The  estimate  is,  to  allow  6 ft.  in  diameter  for  sewers. 

Water  could  he  taken  from  Stony  Brook  to  flush  or  scour 
the  sewer ^ and  the  arrangements  would  he  better  than  any 
SEWER  IN  Boston.  Another  brook,  (Smelt  Brook)  runs  across 
Washington  street,  and  could  be  used  to  great  advantage. 
There  were  a great  many  difficulties  in  Boston  that  we  should 
not  have  to  contend  with  in  Roxbury  in  constructing  sewers. 

The  statement  and  views  of  Mr.  Parrott  were  concurred  in 
by  Mr.  Poole. 

Much  has  been  said  in  reference  to  the  lower  part  of  our 
city,  its  condition,  and  want  of  drainage.  That  some  kind  of 
drainage  may  be  required,  before  a great  while,  we  have 
never  doubted,  but  that  it  must  be  done  independent  of  the 
Boston  drains,  is,  we  think,  clearly  demonstrated. 

The  counsel  for  the  petitioners,  in  his  report,  is  extravagant 
in  his  praise  of  ‘^our  ancient  neighbor,”  for  what  she  has 
done  by  her  system  of  underground  drainage.  But  it  was 
shown  in  evidence  that  Boston  was  not  entirely  drained  now, 
and  that  there  were  difficulties  of  drainage  in  the  section  near 
the  Back  Bay ; that  some  of  the  made  lands  there  were  hard- 
ly fit  to  live  upon,  by  reason  of  their  not  being  filled  up  to  a 
proper  height,  and  that  the  cellars  of  many  dwellings  were 
below  high  water  mark;  and  there  was  one  whole  street 
nearly  on  a level  with  low  water. 

The  streets  belonging  to  the  city  were  shown,  by  abundant 
testimony,  to  be  in  good  condition,  and  kept  in  good  repair. 
That  they  are  fully  equal  to  the  streets  of  the  adjoining  cities 


28 


ANNEXATION. 


[May, 


and  towns,  was  clearly  established.  It  was  shown  that  we 
have  about  23  3-10  miles  of  accepted  streets,  and  11  1-3  miles 
of  private  streets,  not  accepted,  and  belonging  to  private  indi- 
viduals. It  was  shown,  by  abundant  testimony,  that  our 
streets  were  in  good  order ; that  streets  were  accepted  by  the 
city  when  of  suitable  width,  properly  graded,  and  in  suitable 
order  for  travel,  and  a deed  of  land  and  plan  presented ; that 
since  the  organization  of  the  city  government  a great  deal  had 
been  done  to  them,  and  to  sidewalks ; and  that,  in  the  lan- 
guage of  the  committee  of  citizens  opposed  to  annexation,  If 
there  are  any  streets  in  the  city  which  are  ^ a disgrace  to  it,’ 
they  are  of  those  which  have  been  opened  by  ‘ private  specu- 
lation,’ for  the  purpose  of  bringing  lands  into  market,  against 
which  the  city  is  sometimes  obliged  to  caution  travellers  that 
they  are  ‘ unsafe,’  and  for  which  the  city  should  in  no  wise 
be  held  responsible.” 

In  reference  to  Public  Malls  and  Squares  it  was  shown  that 
the  city  was  now  doing  something  in'  the  way  of  these  kind 
of  improvements ; that  a square  had  been  laid  out  upon  the 
Munroe  farm,  another  had  been  accepted  on  Cedar  Street, 
another  had  been  recommended  upon  the  city  lands  on  High- 
land Street;  and  when  the  Stony  Brook  lands  are  laid  out 
for  sale,  doubtless,  one  would  be  laid  out  there ; and  that  ne- 
gotiations were  then  pending  in  reference  to  the  purchase  of 
the  old  fort,  but  whether  they  would  be  successful  or  not,  de- 
pended upon  the  cost. 

Much  was  said  of  the  condition  of  the  poorer  class  of  our 
population,  and  the  great  want  of  water  to  supply  the  tene- 
ments, and  the  condition  of  the  streets  where  they  reside. 

It  was  clearly  shown  that  in  some  of  these  localities  an 
abundance  of  water  already  existed,  and  that  a sufficient  sup- 
ply could  be  obtained  in  nearly  every  locality  occupied  by  the 
poorer  classes,  if  the  landlords  would  be  at  a trifling  expense 
in  digging  wells. 

Certain  pages  in  Mr.  Ritchie’s  Report  (quoted  on  p.  14  of 
Mr.  Whiting’s  Report),  were  read  to  the  Committee  by  coun- 
sel for  petitioners ; but  Mr.  Ritchie  stated  that  worse  places  than 


1852.] 


CITY  DOCUMENT.— No.  6. 


29 


those  described  existed,  to  his  knowledge,  in  Boston,;  and 
that  the  condition  of  our  poor  was  better  than  that  of  the  city 
of  Boston.  The  statements  in  his  report  were  correct,  and 
fell  far  short  of  the  condition  of  the  poor  in  some  parts  of  Bos- 
ton and  other  places. 

As  to  the  schedule  of  the  wants  of  boston,  it  is  due  to 
our  “ ancient  neighbor”  to  say,  that  she  did  not  appear  be- 
fore the  Committee,  to  admit  that  she  required  any  or  all  of 
these  alleged  wants ; and  there  was  no  evidence  to  show  that 
her  condition  was  such  as  was  represented  to  be  by  the  pe- 
titioners. We  believe  that  those,  into  whose  hands  the  affairs 
of  Boston  have  been  committed,  are  fully  competent  to  man- 
age the  affairs  and  to  watch  over  the  interests  of  that  city, 
and  that,  in  the  discharge  of  their  duties,  they  require  no  aid 
from  others. 

During  the  examination,  the  Hon.  Samuel  P.  Loud,  Chair- 
man of  the  County  Commissioners  of  Norfolk  County,  appear- 
ed, and  made  a statement,  at  the  request  of  the  Commission- 
ers, as  to  the  condition  of  the  County  and  the  relation  that 
Roxbury  bore  to  it. 

The  statement  of  Mr.  Loud,  in  substance,  was  : — That  the 
debt  of  the  County  of  Norfolk  was  about  $97,000,  incurred 
for  the  erection  of  the  Jail  and  the  House  of  Correction,  built 
within  the  last  year  and  a half,  and  it  will  take  about  nine 
years  to  extinguish  that  debt.  It  became  imperiously  neces- 
sary to  erect  these  buildings.  The  inmates  have  doubled 
within  five  years  past,  and  the  expenses  have  increased  100 
per  cent.  The  buildings  were  erected  mainly  on  account  of 
Roxbury,  which  contributes  its  proportion  of  the  inmates. 
The  numbers  now  have  arrived  at  that  point,  where  business 
can  be  carried  on  to  some  profit,  and  the  business  of  boot  and 
shoe  making  has  just  been  established.  In  the  female  de- 
partment, a matron  has  recently  been  appointed.  If  the  num- 
bers were  reduced,  it  would  not  be  profitable  to  carry  on  the 
business. 

The  valuation  of  Roxbury  is  about  one  third  to  one  quarter 
of  the  whole  valuation  of  the  County.  If  Roxbury  was  taken 


ANNEXATION. 


30 


[May, 


away  from  it,  the  financial  interests  of  the  County  would  be 
affected  by  the  change. 

It  may  be  proper  to  state,  in  this  connection,  that  it  was  in 
evidence  that  three-quarters  of  all  the  Probate  business  was 
transacted  at  Roxbury.  Out  of  seventy-three  courts  held  by 
the  Judge  of  Probate,  fifty^two  were  held  at  Roxbury. 

In  regard  to  the  Civil  Courts  and  Registry  of  Deeds,  it  was 
shown  that  the  interests  of  parties  would  not  be  better  accom- 
modated by  any  change.  It  was  easier  to  examine  titles  at 
Dedham  than  at  Boston ; and  from  those  who  have  had  large 
experience  in  making  conveyances,  no  inconvenience  was 
ever  experienced  by  them  from  the  location  of  the  Registry  at 
Dedham. 

At  the  close  of  the  hearing,  the  counsel  for  the  city  of  Bos- 
ton, M.  K.  Booth,  Esq.,  stated  that  the  city  of  Boston  desired 
a reference  of  this  subject  to  the  next  General  Court,  and  a 
letter  was  also  read  to  the  Committee  from  the  Mayor  of  Bos- 
ton, in  behalf  of  the  Committee  of  the  City  Council  of  Boston, 
requesting  such  reference. 

Mr.  Whiting,  in  behalf  of  the  petitioners,  said  he  felt  con- 
strained to  yield  to  the  request  made  by  the  city  of  Boston. 

Mr.  Clarke,  in  behalf  of  Roxbury,  objected  to  a reference  to 
the  next  General  Court,  said  this  was  the  third  year  the  sub- 
ject had  been  before  the  Legislature,  and  that  the  city  of  Rox- 
bury desired  that  it  might  be  settled  now  upon  its  merits.  In 
regard  to  the  petitioners  yielding  to  the  request  of  the  city  of 
Boston,  he  said  he  was  ready  to  prove  that  the  suggestion  for 
a reference  to  the  next  General  Court,  was  made  to  the  city 
of  Boston  by  the  counsel  for  the  petitioners. 

The  question  was  submitted  to  the  Committee,  on  the  evi- 
dence, without  argument,  with  the  understanding  that  they 
were  to  report,  either  a reference  to  the  next  General  Court, 
or  leave  to  withdraw. 

After  deliberation  the  Committee  unanimously  came  to  the 
conclusion,  that  the  petitioners  had  failed  to  make  out  a case, 
and  that  they  have  leave  to  withdraw  their  petition,  and  sub- 
mitted the  following  report. 


1S52.J 


CITY  DOCUMENT.— No.  6. 


31 


[Senate.. ..Doc.  No.  108.] 

(lommoniDcciltl)  of  iillassadjttsctto. 

In  Senate,  April,  15,  1852. 

The  Joint  Standing  Committee  on  Towns,  to  which  was 
referred  the  petition  of  Isaac  T.  Allard,  and  others,  praying 
that  the  city  of  Roxbury  might  be  annexed  to  Boston,  have 
duly  considered,  and  examined  with  all  the  care  and  diligence 
of  which  they  are  capable,  during  a protracted  hearing  of  the 
evidence  presented  before  them,  both  for  and  against  the  union 
of  the  two  cities,  and  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  al- 
though Boston  at  some  future  period  may  include  within  her 
limits  not  only  Roxbury,  but  all  the  towns  and  villages  within 
a circuit  of  four  to  six  miles ; when  such  a union  will  be 
sought  by  the  city  herself,  to  make  room  for  her  inhabitants, 
and  to  increase  her  influence  and  popularity  abroad ; but  in 
the  opinion  of  your  Committee  the  exigency  had  not  yet  ar- 
rived when  it  would  be  advantageous  for  the  citizens  of  Rox- 
bury to  change  their  municipal  relations,  or  for  the  County  of 
Norfolk  to  dissolve  its  connections  with  the  city  of  Roxbury. 
All  the  wants  and  difficulties,  complained  of  by  the  petition- 
ers, can  be  as  well  supplied  and  remedied  without  annexa- 
tion as  with  it.  And  further,  it  was  not  in  evidence  before 
the  Committee,  that  there  was  a majority  of  the  legal  voters 
of  Roxbury  desiring  annexation.  Your  Committee  therefore 
unanimously  report,  that  the  petitioners  have  leave  to  \yith- 
draw  their  petition. 

By  order  of  the  Committee, 

Zenas  D.  Basset,  Chairman. 

We  cannot  conclude  this  report  without  acknowledging  our 
obligations  to  the  Hon.  John  J.  Clarke  and  William  Gaston, 
Escp,  for  their  professional  services,  voluntarily  given  to  the 
city,  in  opposing  the  prayer  of  the  petitioners.  By  careful 
preparation  prior  to  the  hearing,  by  their  vigilance  in  guard- 
ing the  interests  of  the  city,  by  professional  skill  and  untiring 


32 


ANNEXATION. 


[May, 


industry  during  the  protracted  hearing,  they  contributed 
largely  in  bringing  this  question  to  a happy  and  successful 
termination.  The  Committee  would  therefore  recommend 
the  adoption  of  the  accompanying  resolves. 

All  which  is  respectfully  submitted, 

For  the  Committee, 

SAMUEL  WALKER,  Chairman. 


CITY  OF  ROXBURY, 


In  Board  of  Aldermen,  ) 
May  17th,  1852. 

Resolved, 'That  our  fellow  citizens  John  J.  Clark  and  Wm. 
Gaston,  Esqs.  Counsellors  at  Law,  by  their  professional  servi- 
ces voluntarily  given  to  the  City  of  Roxbury,  in  opposing  the 
petition  of  Isaac  T.  Allard  and  others,  to  the  Legislature  of 
this  Commonwealth,  for  the  annexation  of  this  city  to  Boston, 
are  entitled  to  the  cordial  thanks  of  the  City  Council  and  all 
citizens  of  Roxbury,  who  desire  that  our  city  shall  continue 
to  bear  the  honored  name  of  Old  Roxbury. 

Resolved,  That  those  gentlemen,  acting  as  the  Counsel  of 
the  City  of  Roxbury,  by  careful  preparation,  prior  to  the  hear- 
ing before  the  Legislative  Committee;  by  their  vigilance  in 
guarding  the  interests  of  the  city,  by  professional  skill  and 
untiring  industry  during  the  hearing,  have  contributed  largely 
towards  the  defeat  of  a project  not  in  accordance  with  the 
wishes  of  a large  majority  of  our  fellow  citizens. 

Resolved,  That  the  thanks  of  the  City  Council  of  the  city 
of  Roxbury,  be,  and  they  hereby  are  tendered  to  Messrs. 
Clarke  and  Gaston  for  their  valuable  services,  and  that  these 
Resolutions  be  entered  upon  the  records  of  this  Board,  and 
that  the  City  Clerk  be  requested  to  transmit  to  each  of  those 
gentlemen  an  attested  copy  thereof. 


5 


■:  ■ ■;>  , •>:  ■■  '■  , 

,v,'(/ I,.,,,  . , , 

’ > -:r  : )i'-  .,  ] tj 

,cwf  -■//''  > O'l 

IfiJ  .li,;::  '' 

'iiftffiim'}  lfftfh:'ph  urn  . 

of  7v<n.j 

ni  ')'^'  i 'i:.l7  frh.if  -■:  ,fK>'  OjV|i:i^  ‘ 


